Lisa Dusseault wrote:
>
> When a user does a COPY or MOVE from one binding to another binding to
> the same resource, this should be flagged as an error. Since this has
> to interoperate with existing clients that won't look at the error body,
> the status code would have to stand alone. 409 is already used for
> non-existent parent collections, so that can't be reused. Possibly 403
> which in 2518 for COPY means "_ The source and destination URIs are the
> same."
Why would that be an error?
If I have two bindings b1 and b2 to the same resource B, MOVE b1 -> b2
will either fail (for Overwrite: F) or will first remove binding b2,
then execute the rename. The result will be that there'll be one
remaining binding (b2).
For the same situation, COPY seems to be no-op. Dead properties and
content will be "replaced" by their current values (with possible side
effects on ETag and so on...).
What am I missing?
Regards, Julian
--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760